Conflict resolution styles
1.Evasion. A person who adheres to this strategy seeks to escape conflict. This strategy should be appropriate if the situation can resolve itself (this happens rarely, but it does happen), if now there are no conditions for effective conflict resolution, but after some time they will appear.
2.Smoothing. This style is based on the theses “Don’t rock the boat”, “Let’s live together”. The “smoother” tries not to let out the signs of conflict, confrontation, calling for solidarity. At the same time, the problem underlying the conflict is often forgotten. The result may be temporary peace. Negative emotions do not appear, but they accumulate. Sooner or later, an unattended problem and accumulated negative emotions will lead to an explosion, the consequences of which will be dysfunctional.
3. Coercion. Anyone who adheres to this strategy tries to force people to accept their point of view at any cost; he is not interested in the opinions of others. This style associated with aggressive behavior, coercive power and traditional power are used here to influence other people.
This style can become effective if it is used in a situation that threatens the existence of the organization or prevents it from achieving its goals. The leader defends the interests of the business, the interests of the organization, and sometimes he simply must be persistent. Main disadvantage The use of this strategy by a manager means suppression of the initiative of subordinates and the possibility of repeated outbreaks of conflict.
4. Compromise. This style is characterized by accepting the other party's point of view, but only to a certain extent. The ability to compromise in management situations is highly valued, as it reduces ill will and allows conflict to be resolved relatively quickly. But after some time, the dysfunctional consequences of a compromise solution may appear, for example, dissatisfaction with “half-hearted” decisions. At the same time, the conflict in a slightly modified form may arise again, since the problem that gave rise to it remains unresolved.
5. Problem solving (cooperation). This style is based on the conviction of the parties to the conflict that differences of opinion are the inevitable result of the fact that smart people have their own ideas about what is right and what is wrong. With this strategy, participants recognize each other’s right to their own opinion and are ready to understand it, which gives them the opportunity to analyze the reasons for disagreements and find a solution acceptable to everyone. One who relies on cooperation does not try to achieve his goal at the expense of others, but looks for a solution to the problem.
Conflict resolution styles - concept and types. Classification and features of the category “Conflict Resolution Styles” 2017, 2018.
There are five main interpersonal styles of conflict resolution: Avoidance. This style is characterized by implying that a person is trying to escape conflict. One of the ways to resolve conflict is to avoid getting into situations that provoke the occurrence of... .
There are five main INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES: avoidance, smoothing, coercion, compromise and problem solving. EVASION. This style implies that a person is trying to avoid conflict. As Robert Blake and Jane Mouton point out, one way...
There are five main interpersonal styles of conflict resolution: 1 - avoidance, 2 - smoothing, 3 - coercion, 4 - compromise and 5 - problem solving. 1. The first style is avoidance of resolving a contradiction that has arisen when one of the parties who is presented with...
Basic interpersonal styles of conflict resolution were developed by K. Thomas. He points out that there are 5 main styles of behavior in conflict: accommodation, compromise, cooperation, avoidance, rivalry (or competition). Behavior style in a specific... .
Structural methods of conflict management Methods of conflict resolution. There are several effective ways managing a conflict situation. They can be divided into two categories: structural and interpersonal. To resolve... .
Styles of behavior in conflict
Conflict is a social phenomenon generated by nature itself public life. This is a conscious phenomenon and a deliberate action. It confirms the truth that man differs from other living beings in that his intentions and actions are guided not by innate instincts, but by goals that he himself develops in the process of his life. Man is endowed with something specific, only to him inherent quality- mind, the ability to reflect the really existing world.
Conflict is a clash of opposing interests based on rivalry, confrontation or lack of mutual understanding on various issues. Or in other words, conflict appears as an awareness at the level of an individual, a social group or a broader community of the inconsistency of the process of interaction and relationships, differences, and even incompatibility of interests, values and goals, as a meaningful confrontation.
Conflict situations arise in all spheres of public life - be it economics, politics, everyday life, culture or ideology. They are inevitable as an integral component of the development of society and man himself. It is impossible to imagine the formation of an individual or the activity of an organization without internal tension, contradictions, overcoming stagnation and inertia, clashes and struggle. Their reasons may be, in particular, business conditions, a confluence of circumstances unfavorable for the functioning of the organization; Problems work motivation related to remuneration, content and prestige of work, relationships in the team between individuals and social groups; structural inconsistencies, breakdowns in communication links, employee dissatisfaction with management decisions; emotional outbursts caused by differences in temperament, character and behavior of people working together, their age and life experience, moral ideas, level of education, qualifications and general culture.
Freedom from conflict is an illusion, a utopia, and certainly not a good thing. Conflicts, like any social contradictions, are a form of real social connections, which precisely express the interaction of individuals, the relations of social groups and communities with the discrepancy and incompatibility of their needs, motives and roles. In short, where people act, there is almost always room for conflict.
There are five styles of conflict behavior: avoidance, accommodation, confrontation, cooperation, compromise.
What is the difference between each of these styles of behavior in conflicts?
Evasion as a style of behavior in conflicts is characterized by a clear lack of desire on the part of those involved in a conflict situation to cooperate with anyone and make active efforts to realize their own interests, as well as to meet opponents; the desire to get out of the conflict field, to escape the conflict.
Adaptation as a style of passive behavior is characterized by the tendency of conflict participants to soften, smooth out a conflict situation, maintain or restore harmony in relationships through compliance, trust, and readiness for reconciliation. Unlike evasion, this style involves taking into account the interests of opponents to a greater extent and not avoiding joint actions with them. The adaptation is applicable to any type of conflict. But, perhaps, this style of behavior is most suitable for conflicts organizational nature, in particular along the hierarchical vertical: subordinate - superior, subordinate - boss, etc. In such situations, it may be extremely necessary to value the maintenance of mutual understanding, friendly disposition and atmosphere business cooperation, do not give scope to heated polemics, expressions of anger, and especially threats, to be constantly ready to give up your own preferences if they are capable of damaging the interests and rights of your opponent. Of course, the adaptation style chosen as a model of conflict behavior may turn out to be ineffective. It is not at all acceptable in situations where the subjects of the conflict are gripped by feelings of resentment and irritation, do not want to respond to each other with friendly reciprocity, and their interests and goals cannot be smoothed out and agreed upon.
Confrontation in its focus is aimed at, acting actively and independently, achieving one’s own interests without taking into account the interests of other parties directly involved in the conflict, or even to the detriment of them. Those who use this style of behavior seek to impose their solution to the problem on others, rely only on their own strength, and do not accept joint actions. At the same time, elements of maximalism, strong-willed pressure, desire by any means, including forceful pressure, administrative and economic sanctions, intimidation, blackmail, etc., to force the opponent to accept the point of view he disputes, to get the better of him at all costs, to win the conflict.
Cooperation, like confrontation, is aimed at maximum realization by the parties to the conflict of their own interests. But unlike the confrontational style, cooperation involves not an individual, but a joint search for a solution that meets the aspirations of all conflicting parties. This is possible subject to timely and accurate diagnosis of the problem that gave rise to the conflict situation, an understanding of both external manifestations and hidden causes of the conflict, and the willingness of the parties to act together to achieve a common goal for all. The cooperative style is readily used by those who perceive conflict as normal. social life, as the need to solve a particular problem without causing damage to any party.
Compromise occupies a middle place in the grid of conflict behavior styles. It means the disposition of the conflict participant(s) to resolve disagreements on the basis of mutual concessions and achieve partial satisfaction of their interests. This style equally involves active and passive actions, the application of individual and collective efforts. The compromise style is preferable because it usually blocks the path to hostility and allows, albeit partially, to satisfy the claims of each of the parties involved in the conflict.
Methods of conflict resolution.
The style of behavior in a conflict coincides in meaning with the method of resolving it. Regarding communication between people, style is a manner of behaving, a set of characteristic techniques that distinguish the way of action, i.e. in this case way to overcome conflict situation, solving the problem that led to the conflict. Therefore, the path to conflict resolution lies through the same five methods mentioned in the previous section. In this case, it is necessary to take into account a number of significant circumstances, which in one way or another come down to the use of incentive measures, including persuasion and coercion.
Firstly, the main task in resolving any conflict is to, if possible, give it a functionally positive character, to minimize the inevitable damage from negative consequences confrontation or intense confrontation. This result is achievable if the parties to the conflict show an honest and friendly approach to resolving their differences, a common interest in this, if they make joint efforts to find a positive solution based on a sustainable, stable agreement of all parties. At the same time, it is not at all necessary that the general agreement be unanimity - a complete coincidence of the positions of all participants in the conflict resolution process.
Secondly, a twofold outcome of a particular conflict is possible - its full or partial resolution. In the first case, an exhaustive elimination of the causes that caused the conflict situation is achieved, and in the second option, there is a superficial weakening of disagreements, which over time can re-emerge. The measures taken are aimed at convincing or forcing the conflicting parties to stop hostile actions, to exclude anyone’s defeat, and to point out means to promote mutual understanding.
Thirdly, an individual or social group, correlating the interests of the conflicting parties and the parameters of their behavior, they choose a priority method for resolving the conflict, the most accessible and acceptable in the given conditions. It is necessary to understand that not every style, and therefore not every method, is suitable for a specific situation. Each method is effective only when resolving a certain type of conflict.
The method of confrontation is often chosen by participants in collective labor disputes, local and general. social conflicts. They often take their disagreements with employers on social and labor issues to an extreme form - a strike, using the threat of causing tangible economic damage, as well as psychological pressure through holding rallies.
Cooperation is a very effective way to resolve conflicts in organizations, allowing, through open collective discussion and mutual agreement, to achieve satisfaction of the interests of the conflicting parties.
A widespread way to resolve conflicts is compromise. A classic example of a compromise is the relationship between a seller and a buyer in the market - the result of purchase and sale (mainly an agreement on price) and is the desired fruit of a compromise, mutual concessions that suit both parties.
At the same time, the constant appeal to compromises shows that there are no universal, only suitable means, that any method as a set of techniques and rules has limitations depending on the situation, the parties to the conflict and the problems they solve. Compromise is convenient because it does not oppose other methods of conflict resolution and does not exclude their use on an equal basis or in combination with itself.
Fourthly, the conflicting party may certain conditions use not one, but two or three or even all methods of conflict resolution. This circumstance also serves as confirmation of the fact that none of the five styles of behavior in conflicts or methods of resolving them can be singled out, recognized as the best and, accordingly, as the worst. The main thing is that you need to acquire the ability to usefully use any of the methods, to consciously make one or another choice based on a specific conflict situation.
Description of the conflict situation
After work, the husband and wife return home. Everyone had a hard day. We had dinner and had tea. The question arises: who washes the dishes? The husband suddenly remembers that there is a disassembled iron in the garage, and his wife urgently needs to wash her clothes. A conflict is brewing: the wife remembers everything she does while her husband sits and plays at the computer, and the husband says that he doesn’t force his wife to dig the garden or screw the wheels to the car.
The wife chooses a style for resolving this conflict by leaving the conflict situation: it is better to wash the dishes herself in five minutes than to tell her husband for half an hour how good he is. It would be possible to find a compromise - now the two of us wash the dishes, and then we’ll go dig the garden together. But in my case, it will take even more time than explaining to my husband how good he is. The resolution of a conflict situation also depends on the characters of the parties. In this situation, the husband is the undoubted leader, since the wife has chosen this style of behavior in conflict. Although, maybe they are both just very tired, and there is no strength left for conflict.
There are five main INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES: avoidance, smoothing, coercion, compromise and problem solving.
EVASION. This style is characterized by implying that a person is trying to escape conflict. One of the ways to resolve a conflict is not to get into situations that provoke the emergence of contradictions, and not to enter into a discussion of issues that are fraught with disagreement. Then you won’t have to get into an excited state, even if you are trying to solve a problem.
SMOOTHING. This style is characterized by behavior. which is dictated by the belief that there is no point in getting angry because “we are all one happy team and we should not rock the boat.” The “Smoother” tries not to let out signs of conflict and bitterness, appealing to the need for solidarity. Unfortunately, they completely forget about the problem underlying the conflict. You can extinguish the desire for conflict in another person by repeating: “It’s not a big deal. Think about the good things that have happened here today.” The result may be peace, harmony and warmth, but the problem will remain. There is no longer any possibility of expressing emotions, but they live inside and accumulate. General anxiety becomes apparent, and the likelihood that an explosion will eventually occur increases.
COMPULSION. Within this style, attempts to force people to accept their point of view at any cost prevail. The one who tries to do this is not interested in the opinions of others. A person using this style tends to be aggressive and usually uses power through coercion to influence others. The conflict can be taken under control by showing that you have the strongest power, suppressing your opponent, wresting a concession from him by right of superior. This coercive style can be effective in situations where the leader has significant power over subordinates. The disadvantage of this style is that... that it suppresses the initiative of subordinates, creates a high probability that not everyone will be taken into account important factors, since only one point of view is presented. It can cause resentment, especially among younger and more educated staff.
COMPROMISE. This style is characterized by accepting the other party's point of view, but only to some extent. The ability to compromise is highly valued in management situations, as it minimizes ill will and often allows conflict to be resolved quickly to the satisfaction of both parties. However, using a compromise at an early stage of a conflict that has arisen over an important decision can prevent the diagnosis of the problem and reduce the time it takes to find an alternative. Such a compromise means agreeing only to avoid a quarrel, even if this involves a failure to act prudently. This trade-off is one of being satisfied with what is available rather than persistently seeking what is logical in light of the available facts and data.
SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM. This style is an acknowledgment of differences of opinion and a willingness to engage with other points of view in order to understand the causes of the conflict and find a course of action acceptable to all parties. Anyone who uses this style does not try to achieve his goal at the expense of others, but rather looks for the best solution to a conflict situation. Difference of opinion is seen as an inevitable result. that smart people have their own ideas about what is right and what is wrong. Emotions can only be eliminated through direct dialogues with a person whose view is different from yours. Deep Scan and conflict resolution are possible, only this requires maturity and the art of working with people... Such constructiveness in resolving conflict (by solving a problem) helps create an atmosphere of sincerity, so necessary for the success of the individual and the company as a whole.
Thus, in difficult situations Where diversity of thought and accurate information are essential to sound decision making, conflicting opinions may even need to be encouraged and the situation managed using a problem-solving style. Other styles can also successfully limit or prevent conflict situations, but they will not lead to optimal solution issue because not all points of view have been examined equally thoroughly. It is known from research that high-performing companies used a problem-solving style more than low-performing companies in conflict situations. In these high-performing organizations, leaders openly discussed their differences of opinion, without emphasizing the differences, but without pretending that they did not exist. They searched for a solution until they finally found it. They also tried to prevent or reduce the emergence of conflict by concentrating real decision-making powers in those divisions and levels of the management hierarchy where the greatest values and information about the factors influencing the decision are concentrated. Although there is not much research in this area yet, a number of works confirm the effectiveness of this approach to conflict management.
Conclusion
1. Conflict means disagreement between the parties, in which one party tries to achieve acceptance of its views and prevent the other party from doing the same. Conflict can occur between individuals and groups and between groups.
2. Potential Causes of Conflict – Shared resources, task interdependence, differences in goals, differences in perceptions and values, differences in personal styles and backgrounds, and poor communication. People often do not respond to situations of potential conflict unless the situations involve minimal personal loss or threat.
3. Structural methods of conflict resolution include clarification of production expectations, coordination and integration mechanisms, setting higher-level tasks and a reward system.
4. Potential negative consequences of conflict include: decreased productivity, dissatisfaction, decreased morale, increased turnover, decreased social interaction, decreased communication, and increased loyalty to subgroups and informal organizations. However, with effective intervention, conflict can have positive consequences. For example, more in-depth work on finding solutions, diversity of opinions in decision making and improved collaboration in the future.
5. There are five styles of conflict resolution. Evasion represents withdrawal from conflict. Smoothing– behavior as if there is no need to be irritated. Compulsion– the use of legal authority or pressure to impose one’s point of view. Compromise– concession to some extent to another point of view is an effective measure, but may not lead to an optimal solution. Problem solving– a style preferred in situations that require a diversity of opinions and data, characterized by open recognition of differences in views and the clash of these views in order to find a solution acceptable to both parties.
List of used literature
1. Meskon M.H., Albert M., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management. – M., “Business” – 1992
2. Borodkin F.M. Koryak N.M. Warning: conflict. – M., 1989
3. V.S. Yanchevsky. Employment contract. – Zhitomir, 1996
4. Sarzhveladze N.I. Personality and its interaction with the environment. _ Tb., 1989
5. Scott G Ginny. Conflicts: ways to overcome./ trans. from English – Kyiv: Publishing house. Society "Verzilin and K LTD", 1991
Everyone has their own, but they are not always ideal for every situation. Every day we have to defend our interests to one degree or another, find compromises with other people. That is, resolving social conflicts is a normal and natural process of our lives. You can avoid it only by going into complete isolation.
But even there it will not be possible to avoid conflicts - you will constantly feel a clash of your own polar interests. If you master the resolution of social conflicts, this skill can be applied in any field. As a result, in each of them you will be able to develop and strengthen the relationships you need.
“A wise man will always find a way not to start a war.” I. Yamamoto.
What is conflict?
Few people think about What is conflict what it is like, what are its causes. But it is precisely this knowledge that helps to select necessary methods conflict resolution. Otherwise, unresolved conflicts, even external ones, develop into internal dissatisfaction, which not only spoils character, but can seriously undermine health.So, conflict is a clash of opposing independent opinions of individuals, groups of people, which causes negative emotions. Also, these opinions can arise in the mind of one person. Typically this is a mismatch life values, ideas, motivation, perceptions, desires. The main ways to resolve conflict should solve people's needs for security, self-worth, intimacy, and privacy.
Conflict resolution styles
If we summarize all existing methods of conflict resolution, we can identify the core of the most universal and effective ones. The main conflict resolution styles look like this:1. Competition
It is used in a situation where a person tends to seek to defend personal interests at the expense of others. He resolves the conflict by expressing his authoritarian opinion, which is not subject to discussion. These conflict resolution styles can only be used if you are completely sure that you are right. Otherwise, it will lead to another, more acute conflict.2. Evasion
Conflict resolution methods may be associated with a banal escape from an unpleasant situation. This is usually done if flight is less damaging to one’s self-esteem than defeat in a conflict. But this is only a delay in resolving the conflict, which can only aggravate it. The method should be used in extreme cases, when you really need a delay to collect additional information and analyze it.3. Device
When a person is completely oriented toward other people and is ready to give up his interests just to resolve a conflict, this is a typical adaptation. These conflict resolution styles are justified if for you a good relationship much more important than winning an argument. Or the conflict itself can seriously harm you.4. Cooperation
In this case, everyone is ready to sacrifice some part of their interests in order to find a common solution suitable for everyone. This requires time and effort to fully assess the situation, find common interests, and then a way to realize them. This is the most effective, but also the most time-consuming method.5. Compromise
When the parties want to achieve the same thing, but it is impossible to achieve this together, they have to make concessions to each other. This is the most common method when other basic conflict resolution styles fail.“Conflict situations are inevitable, but a smart person looks for a way out of them, and a fool looks for an entrance.” V. Gubarev.
Basic methods of conflict resolution
All main methods and styles of conflict resolution are conventionally divided into negative and positive. The first ones lead to the destruction of the unity of the parties, and the positive ones lead to its preservation. But in any case, this is a struggle between two sides, which has its own characteristics. For example, each side strives for one thing - the maximum concentration of all its forces in the conflict zone on a pre-selected convenient field battles. Then all that remains is to choose the right moment to attack.The attack must end with a change in the conflict situation in one's favor. This is achieved in the following ways:
Correct assessment of the enemy's capabilities and situation.
Informing (true or false) the enemy of intentions.
Changing the balance of forces;
Impact on the enemy, his situation and defense.
Various combinations of these methods are usually used.
Fighting methods
What methods are used to combat conflict situations? The main methods and styles of conflict resolution are aimed at ensuring that the winning party receives freedom of action. This is achieved in different ways by limiting the enemy’s freedom, creating freedom for oneself, choosing and winning a better position, etc.Another one strategic goal– control centers of the opponent. During the discussion, leading individuals or institutions are discredited, negative traits of leading individuals are criticized, and much more. It is important to choose here right time and a place to launch a targeted strike, as well as the concentration of the necessary forces. Therefore, the method of prolonging the conflict is often used, expressing one’s opinion in the most last resort. In order to lure an opponent into a trap, avoiding the fight is often used. This concerns negative methods.
Positive ones are based on negotiations - debates, the purpose of which is mutual concessions. For negotiations to be effective, they must be conducted according to the following principles:
Distinguishing negotiators from their subject. It is necessary to discuss only the subject.
Focus only on the interests of the parties, and not on their positions.
Drawing up a list of solution options that are beneficial for both parties.
Formation of objective criteria for assessing the situation.
When negotiating, it is important to reduce the emotionality of communication as much as possible. It is important to be able to comply with:
Calmness, both verbal and non-verbal.
Control of emotions and behavior.
Be able to listen to others and pay attention to their feelings.
Understanding that with one situation different people cope differently.
Self-control without offending others.
And a few more secrets
“Any conflict can always be resolved by a wise man who controls himself.” G.Alexandrov.
Personal conflicts that have not been fully resolved resume again, sometimes with a vengeance. But not all conflict situations can be completely resolved. In any case, an acute situation is the path to development, gaining trust and confidence in future relationships.
If it seems to you that the conflict is simply terrible, it means that you are afraid of losing a lot in it. Therefore, they are subconsciously ready to give in. We must be able to adequately assess the situation.
This basic methods and styles of conflict resolution, from which everyone can find the most suitable one.
“Your style of behavior in a particular conflict is determined by the extent to which you want to satisfy your own interests (acting passively or actively) and the interests of the other party (acting jointly or individually). If we represent this in graphical form, we get Thomas–Kilmann grid, allowing you to determine the place and name for each of the five main styles of conflict resolution.
The Thomas-Kilmann Grid will help everyone determine their own style and the style of anyone else. Start with the side marked active and passive. If your reaction is passive, then you will try to avoid conflict or adapt; if it is active, then you will make attempts, by competing or collaborating, to resolve the conflict. You can make such assessments for yourself and for all parties to the conflict.
Thomas–Kilmann grid
If you prefer joint actions, you will try to resolve the conflict together with other participants. If you prefer to act individually, you will compete with the opposing side in solving the problem or look for a way to avoid solving it. The degree of cooperative behavior can also be easily assessed for you and for other people.
Together, these parts of the grid form a matrix of five styles with a compromise style in the middle. It includes joint and individual actions, as well as passive and active behavior. If you carefully analyze your behavior in conflict, you will recognize the style that you usually resort to in conflict. This way you can also determine the styles that the people you are interested in usually use. You may prefer a different style as needed." At the same time, it is important to know which styles are most effective in resolving conflicts of one type or another. Therefore, we will describe each of the mentioned styles.
Competition style
“A person who uses a competitive style is very active and prefers to go about resolving the conflict in his own way. He is not very interested in cooperation with other people, but he is capable of strong-willed decisions. He tries first of all to satisfy his own interests - to the detriment of the interests of others, forcing them to accept his solution to the problem. To achieve his goal, he uses his strong-willed qualities, and he succeeds if his will is strong enough.
The competitive style is effective when you have some power; you are confident that your decision or approach in a given situation is correct, and you have the opportunity to insist on it. However, this is not a style that should be used in personal relationships if you want to get along with people, because the competitive style leads to alienation. If you use this style in a situation in which you do not have enough power, for example when your point of view differs from that of your boss on some issue, you may suffer a severe defeat.
Here are examples of when this style should be used:
The outcome is very important to you, and you place a big bet on your solution to the problem;
The decision must be made quickly, and you have enough power to do so;
You feel that you have no other choice or that you have nothing to lose;
You are in critical situation, which requires instant response;
Required to accept non-standard solution, whose justice there is no time to convince.”
Evasion style
“This style is implemented when a person does not defend his rights, does not cooperate with anyone - he simply avoids resolving the conflict. You can use this style when the issue at hand is not that important to you, when you don't want to spend energy on solving it, or when you feel like you are in a hopeless situation. This style is also recommended in cases where you feel you are in the wrong and realize that the other person is right, or when that person has more power. All of these are serious reasons for not defending your own position.”
Avoidance may be appropriate in cases where you are forced to communicate with a difficult person and when there is no good reason to continue contact with him. This style is also suitable for cases when you feel that you do not have enough information to solve a specific problem.
“the outcome is not very important to you or you think that the decision is so trivial that it is not worth wasting energy on it;
The tension is too great and you feel the need to ease the tension;
Solving this problem may bring you further trouble;
You cannot (or do not want) to resolve the conflict in your favor;
You want to gain time, maybe in order to get Additional information or to gain someone's support;
The situation is very difficult, and you feel that resolving the conflict will require too much of you;
You have little power to solve the problem in the way you want;
Others have a better chance of solving this problem;
Trying to solve the problem immediately is dangerous, since opening up and openly discussing the conflict can only worsen the situation."
Walking away or delaying may be an appropriate and constructive response to a conflict, for example, in a case where the conflict can be resolved with an acceptable result on its own and without your participation.
Fixture style
“In this style, they act together with another person, without trying to defend their own interests. You can use this approach when the outcome of the case is extremely important to the other person and not very significant to you. This style is also useful in situations in which you cannot prevail because the other person has more power and/or capabilities.<…>
Since this approach puts your own interests aside, it is better to do this when your contribution in this case is not too large or when you are not betting too much on a positive solution to the problem for you. But you won't want to accommodate someone if you feel wronged. If you feel that you are giving in on something important to you and feel dissatisfied as a result, then the accommodation style in this case is obviously unacceptable. It may also be inappropriate in a situation where you feel that the other person is not going to, in turn, give up something or that this person will not appreciate what you have done. This style should be used when you feel that if you don't give up much, you don't have much to lose.
The main difference between an accommodating style and an avoidance style is that you are working together with another person. In the avoidance style, nothing is done to serve the other person's interests.
Here are the most common situations in which a fitting style is recommended:
You are not particularly concerned about this conflict;
The outcome is much more important to the other person than to you;
The truth is not on your side;
You have little power or little chance of winning;
The other person can learn a valuable lesson from this situation if you give in to him."
Collaboration style
“Following this style, a person actively participates in resolving the conflict and defends his interests, but at the same time tries to cooperate with his opponent. This style requires more work than other approaches to conflict because you first lay out the needs, concerns, and interests of both parties and then discuss them. However, if you have time and the solution to the problem is enough for you important, that is good way searching for a mutually beneficial result and satisfying the interests of all conflicting parties.
The collaborative style is especially effective when one or both parties have hidden needs. In such cases, it can be difficult to immediately determine the source of dissatisfaction. After all, there is a difference between external manifestations (statements or positions in a dispute) and hidden interests or needs that serve as the true causes of a conflict situation.
For example, the apparent “cause” of a certain conflict at work was the slowness of an employee. But this slowness actually hides a deeper reason - job dissatisfaction (insufficient respect, recognition, salary, etc.). If you influence only the superficial manifestation, the employee will refer to his type of temperament, objective circumstances, etc. If you force him to work more quickly, he will find ways to sabotage. And this will be his way of receiving some moral compensation.
The collaborative style encourages each person to openly discuss their needs and wants. Thus, an employee in the situation described above can directly state what he needs. If his boss understands this, adopts a cooperative style, he will meet this person halfway, and as a result the employee will be more active in his work, and thus the problem of procrastination will be positively resolved.
To successfully use the collaborative style, it is necessary to spend some time searching for the hidden interests and needs of the parties. If the parties have realized what the true cause of the conflict is, it is possible to work together to look for new ways to resolve it.
Solving the problem is very important for both parties, and no one wants to be eliminated from it;
You have a close and interdependent relationship with the other party;
You have time to work on the problem that has arisen;
You and the other person are aware of the issue and the wishes of both parties are known;
You and your opponent are willing to offer to put some ideas on the table and discuss them;
All parties involved in the conflict have equal opportunities and are ready to seek a solution to the problem on equal terms.
Collaboration is the most productive approach to conflict resolution. However, this style requires certain conditions to be met. The parties must overcome the negative emotions that accompany conflictual relationships, must be able to explain their desires, express their needs, listen to each other and jointly seek a solution to the problem. The absence of one of these elements makes this approach ineffective. The collaborative style, among other styles, is the most difficult to execute, but the most productive in terms of resolving conflicts and satisfying the interests of all parties."
Compromise style
The meaning of this style is mutual partial concessions in order to develop a compromise solution that would suit both parties in the main.
Compared to cooperation, compromise is more superficial. You do not look for hidden needs and interests, as in the case of a cooperative style, but consider only each other's expressed desires.
For example, a couple wants to spend their vacation in different ways: he is in the mountains, she is by the sea. “Okay, we will spend part of our vacation in the mountains and part on the seashore.”
If the purpose of cooperation is to develop a long-term mutually beneficial solution, then in case of a compromise it may be momentary suitable option. As a result of a successful compromise, a person can express his agreement as follows: “I can live with this.” In some situations, cooperation may not even be possible. Let's say that neither of you has the time or energy necessary to cooperate, or your interests are mutually exclusive. And then only a compromise can help you.
“We list the cases in which the compromise style is most effective:
Both parties have the same capabilities and status, but have mutually exclusive interests;
It is necessary to come to a decision quickly because there is no time;
The parties may be satisfied with a temporary solution;
It is enough to take advantage of short-term benefits;
Other approaches to solving the problem proved impossible;
You can painlessly slightly change your original goal;
Often a compromise is a good retreat or even the last opportunity to come to some kind of solution. You can take this approach from the very beginning if you do not have sufficient resources to achieve what you want, and cooperation is impossible and no one wants unilateral concessions.
When searching for a compromise, one should begin by clarifying the interests and desires of the parties and identifying the area of convergence of interests.”
Choosing a Specific Style
“Each of the above styles is effective only in certain conditions, and none of them can be considered universal. You need to be able to effectively use each of them as needed. Best Approach will be determined by the specific situation, as well as your character.<…>
By choosing not to use a style or feeling uncomfortable using it, you can develop the ability to use it. For example, if you tend to try to accommodate others rather than stand up for yourself, you might want to work on increasing your assertiveness and strengthening your willpower. Then, in appropriate situations, you can use a competitive style.
If you find yourself compromising too often and being a very impatient person, then it may be worth setting yourself the task of learning to be patient in serious conflicts, after which calm cooperation will help you find The best decision» .
Defining your own style
It's likely that you use one or two styles most often. In some cases, you may have one preferred style and other styles that you don't use as often.
Thomas and Kilmann developed the Conflict Resolution Style Test, which is useful for understanding yourself better. This test will help you look at your typical approach objectively by analyzing your reactions to a wide range of conflict situations.
With this test, you can rate yourself for each of the styles discussed, and then determine for yourself which one you use most often, which one you use best, which one you use least often, which one is most convenient for you.
This test can be found, for example, in the book “Conflicts: Ways to Overcome Them” by D. G. Scott.
Rules of conduct in conflict
In our society, people have to face conflicts quite regularly. Therefore, it is useful for everyone to master techniques that can help relieve tension among those in conflict.
Table 11.1
It is worth paying attention to the fact that all the techniques listed above meet the fourth rule of conflict-free behavior (see section 3.2). Compliance with all other rules of conflict-free behavior (see ibid.) improves the situation. On the contrary, any conflictogen can lead to an escalation of the conflict.
In addition, it is useful to remember and follow the recommendations derived from the practice of conflict resolution. Here are these recommendations.
Necessary throughout the conflict show restraint. Of course, you are not able to completely control what happens. emotional states opponent. But if you yourself remain calm, then this alone will encourage the other party to control their emotions and seriously discuss the controversial issue.
Emotional outbursts from your opponent are not excluded, but you should refrain from critical statements. React only to facts, not to emotions.
Try not to focus on the personal characteristics of your opponent that are antipathetic to you. Concentrate all your attention on identifying his interests and needs. Of course, the opponent may turn out to be difficult, tough, unyielding, but any difficulty, aggravated by personal hostility, will be perceived more dramatically.
Throughout the conflict process, it is advisable to remain open to consideration of mutual claims and proposals. To find ways to resolve a conflict situation, look for areas of mutual interests and possible compromises. The more you defend only your position, regardless of the interests of your opponent, the more resistance you will encounter from him.